CONTENTS
TEXTS AND MANUSCRIPTS: DESCRIPTION AND RESEARCH. 3
Hiroshi Kumamoto. Sino-Hrntanica Petersburgensia (Part I). 3 1\1. Vorobyova-Dcsyatovskaya. A Sanskrit Manuscript on Birch-Bark from Bairam-Ali. II. .~1'(1(/'711as and l
PRESENTING THE COLLECTIONS. 40
E. Rczvan. Oriental Manuscripts of Karl Faberge. I: The Qur'iin 40
PRESENTING THE MANUSCRIPT. 62
0. Akimushkin. A Rare Seventeenth-Century Hagiography of the Naqshbandiyya Mujaddidiyya Slwdhs. 62
BOOK REVIEWS. 68
F r o n t c o v e r:
"Portrait of a princess", Muraqqa · X 3 from the St. Petersburg Branch of the Institute of Oriental Studies. Faberge collection. fol. 31 a. 9.5 x 16.5 cm. Moghul school, mid-18th century, watercolour, gouache and gold on paper.
Back cover:
Decorative composition from clements of the double frontispiece of aQur"anic manuscript, the same album, fol. 29a. dimensions within the outer border 18.0 X 21.0 cm. Presumably Tcbriz. I 540s--- I 560s. Mounted in India, mid-18th century. THESA PUBLISHERS Ir\ <-, J-01'1.IC\ 11< l\ Will I ST. PETERSBURG BRANCH OF THE INSTITUTE OF ORIENTAL STUDIES RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
ll!.Jnnuscriptn Orientnlin
"'7nternntionnl douronl for Or1eotnl IY!Jnouscr1pt ~esenrcb
Vol. 7 No. I March 200 I
7-5£..Sd\ .,St. f.'etersbur9 70 L'Y!'.)AnuscriptA OrientAliA. VOL. 7 NO. I MARCH 2001 esting parts of the folklore collections preserved in the more so for their presenting in such well-organised and archive. It is for bringing together pieces of folklore kept informative form. at the largest academic repositories of Eastern documents in Russia that we have to thank Dr. Kulganek, all the I. Petrosyan
Ancient Buddhist Scrolls from Gandhiira. The British Dharmapiida discovered in Khotan was copied in India or Library Kharo.~(hf Fragments. Richard Salomon with Central Asia). Moreover, it is possible that the most ancient contribution by Raymond Allchin and Mark Bernard. of Indian manuscripts has finally appeared. The speculation University of Washington Press, Seattle, 1999, 271 pp.+ proved founded: Salomon gathered all possible proof that it 34 pits. + Appendix. was copied between the beginning of the first and second centuries A. D. The most important link in the chain of The book under review represents a unique feat. Richard proof is the mention of historical figures active at the time Salomon was brave enough to undertake a detailed descrip of the manuscript's creation: mahiik.~atrapa Jihonika and tion of the British Library's entire collection of manuscripts Aspavannana. They can be identified as lndo-Scythian ml and ceramic inscriptions in Kharo~\hl writing. He has taken ers of the early first century A. D .. judging by their names into account all aspects: dating. place of discovery, means known through legends on coins and inscriptions. of preparing writing materials, palaeography. orthography. Salomon successfully integrated the new manuscript special features of language and style. content of identified into Gandhara Buddhism. analysing this in chapter I: "The works. general conclusions about the culture of Gandhara. background: Gandhara and Gandharan Buddhism". The characteristics of the local Buddhist tradition, and novelties book's second chapter provides a detailed description of all introduced by the materials under consideration into the Kharo~\hl writing materials held at the British Library. history of Buddhism. They are divided into two groups: birch-bark manuscripts Since 1962. when John Brough released a separate which have only recently joined the collection. and inscrip volume of fragments from the Dharmapclda manuscript tions on whole ceramic vessels and fragments of inscrip in Kharo~\hT script in Gandharl prakrit from manuscript tions on ostraca. collections in St. Petersburg and Paris. such complete The first part of the book - on the manuscript - is the and detailed studies have been lacking. In his own words, most valuable. Salomon has done immense work, decipher Salomon's book is merely the first volume of his study: ing the manuscript and identifying the texts it contains. It is the publication of the texts themselves with translation is clear that we deal here with a collection, although not all of anticipated in the near future. its parts have yet been identified. The description of newly discovered birch-bark scrolls Salomon notes the following groups of texts identified formed the basis for his first book. and the discovery itself by their contents: served as the stimulus for writing it. It occurred that mem bers of the Manuscript Section of the St. Petersburg Branch I) fragments of Hinayana siitras with commentaries; of the Institute of Oriental Studies were among the first to they are not numerous (see section 2.2.1 ). The best pre learn of these new manuscripts. In 1994. Mark Bernard, served is the Sanglti-s1ltra with an unknown commentary a member of the Preservation and Conservation Depart (fragment 15 ). Texts such as this srltra as an important link ment, Oriental and India Office Collections of the British in the formation of the Ahhidharma-pi{aka and Buddhist Library, worked in the repository of Eastern manuscripts philosophy as an independent branch of knowledge. Frag at the St. Petersburg Branch of the Institute of Oriental ments 12-14 were identified as a text parallel to the Studies. It was he who told us of the difficult task of restor Angullaranikiiya. Fragments 26 + 29 preserve excerpts ing birch-bark manuscripts in lamentable condition recently from an unidentified siitra. acquired by the British Library. Since a preliminary inspec 2) Most numerous in the manuscript are stories which tion showed that the new manuscripts were similar to al arc called avadiina or ptlrvayoga (lit. "past rebirths"). The ready published fragments of the Dharmapclda. we decided principle for selecting avadiinas by content is not clear. that the middle part of this manuscript, which has still not Plots that we well know in Sanskrit and Pali literature are come to light, had finally been found. represented by independent versions; in Salomon's view, R. Salomon's study demonstrates that we were wrong. these are close to stories translated into Chinese as part of The British Library acquired yet another birch-bark manu the Dha1maguptaka canon. Previously, exact infotmation script. probably not linked to the first one. It consisted of on the spread of this school in Gandhara was lacking. Salo 29 fragments. It remains unclear whether this is an entire mon's conclusions are undoubtedly new, but require addi volume in the form of scrolls or whether the scrolls existed tional research. independently. Salomon counted 21 original scrolls of indi vidual fragments. The number of separate hands he identi Especially impo11ant is the question of which type of col fied also totals 21. lection we encounter here. In many ways, the new manu Since news of the discovery appeared. scholarly inter script is close to a birch-bark manuscript from Bairam-Ali est in the manuscript has grown rapidly. There is reason for (Merv oasis. Turkmenia). It is written in Sanskrit, in Brahm! this: the manuscript is from ancient Gandhara and may be script, evidently somewhat later (5-7 centuries A.O.). unique (debate continues over whether a manuscript of the (Excerpts from this manuscript have been published by
c M. I. Voroby~va-Dcsyatm·skaya. ::?001 BOOK REVIEWS 71
Manuscripta Orientalia since 1999). The text of both covered on this territory, there is only one Buddhist text, manuscripts contains quotations from siitras, commentaries which treats violations of rules dictating monastic life in the on them, and a collection of avadiina stories. Both manu local community. It is clear from the texts of the documents scripts present the stories in abbreviated form and with in themselves that this was a somewhat peculiar brand of dications that the text should be told in full ( vistarel}a - Buddhism: he was greatly influenced by local religious be "in detail", with various additional explanations). It seems liefs. The monks also played an active role in the economic that a summary of a story's contents - and in the Bairam life of this tiny state and could own property. The question Ali manuscript we find sometimes only the names of the is, of course, complex, as Buddhist texts in Kushan Brahm! heroes - is necessary as a mnemonic device to recall well writing are not numerous in Central Asia: large numbers of known plots. In both manuscripts, quotations from siitras Brahm! manuscripts began to appear only in the fifth cen are followed by assurances that the siitras are reliable and tury A. D. Early translations of Buddhist texts into Chinese authoritative. There are similarities in other sections that we show that they were based not on Sanskrit, but on Prakrit will note later. texts. But which ones 9 Scholars reject the Pali language as There are also several differences. The Bairam-Ali an answer. They could possibly have been in Gandharl, as manuscript does not mention historical figures. As concerns manuscript in Gandharl could have been brought from the companions of the Buddha Sakyamuni - people North-West India or Gandhara. who lived in his time - there are no discrepancies: the In this regard, certain doubts arise in connection to chap texts of both manuscripts repeatedly mention Ananda and ter VI - "Palaeographic and linguistic features of Gandhara Ajfiatakau1,1<;linya, Ajivaka and Anathapi1,1<;lika, telling also of scrolls", and especially section 6.1 on the Gandharl lan their previous rebirths. The Gandhara manuscripts lacks only guage. Salomon holds that the a\'(/diina texts are close to jiitakas, which make up nearly half of this section in the the colloquial Gandharl spoken in the region. The style and Bairam-Ali manuscript. There is one other important differ scarcity of grammatical fo1ms suggest that we deal here ence: the Bairam-Ali manuscript contains a selection of rules with tales intended to be spoken aloud (p. 140). But was from the Vinaya concluded by a colophon. The colophon Gandharl as attested in manuscripts a spoken language at enumerates the contents of the Sarvastivadins Vinayapi(aka, all 9 (See G. Fussman, "Gandharl ccrite. Gandharl par!ec". in which is in itself an important indication that a canon existed Dialectes dans /es litteratures !Hdo-Ar\'ennes (Paris. 1989), for this school. The Gandhara manuscript also has a section pp 440, 498-9). It is as difficult to answer this question as that is absent in the Bairam-Ali manuscript: "Scholastic Trea the question of whether Pali was a spoken language. And if tises and Commentaries" (section 2.2.2., pp. 26-30). both language were in fact spoken, then who spoke them and One is tempted to conclude that these selections of which texts were read aloud'' Speakers could only have been excerpts from texts of various genres, apparently copied by extremely educated monks, which means that both languages monks for their own use as mnemonics, could also have been would have been "spoken" only by a small group of initiates. used for preaching when the monks set out for new territories In other words, they were languages of the Buddhist elite. In outside of India. This type of literature evidently took shape the main, they were written, literary languages. Copyists of in North-West India and in Gandhara in the first half of the Gandharl texts do not appear to have been paragons of liter first millennium, the "golden age" of Buddhism during which acy; hence the poverty of their language. the faith actively drew new adherents. Gandhara appears for Kani~ka introduced Kharo~\hl writing and the Gandharl the first time in this light; the Bairam-Ali manuscript also language as the state language on the tc1Titory of Bactria not contains a collection that is new to scholarship. We discuss because he felt this was the spoken language of the local the importance of these literary finds below. populace, but because Kharo~!hl writing was the only model 3) The third type of work discovered in the Gandhara for drawing up documents that approximated Aramaic mod manuscript is described in section 2.2.3 - "Verses Texts" els, the documents that served as the basis for Kani~ka. (pp. 30-5). Salomon identifies three texts: a) Anavatapta Salomon's claim that the language of documents from giithii ("Songs of Lake Anavatapta"). The text has been Nia and Krorayna cannot be taken into account because this preserved in part. It is well-known in two Sanskrit versions, was the language of a distant region also seems dubious. It a Pali text, and a Chinese translation; b) part of a poem was there that we find preserved the sort of language for ot~ known in a Pali version: Khaggavisii1.w-sutta ("Rhinoceros ficial documents that took shape in the Kushan empire. This Hom Siitra"). The Bairam-Ali manuscript contains a frag language consists mainly of epistolary formulas. It seems ment of the Sanskrit version of this poem; c) finally, the unfounded to consider this language a spoken tongue. Gandhara manuscript contains verses from the concluding In the case at hand, it appears premature to debate the section of the Dharmapiida (p. 55). existence of a special "canon in the Gandharl language" Among the important questions Salomon touches on (chapter 8, section 8.1.1, "The Gandharl canon issue revis in his work is his attempt to link the initial spread of ited"). The issue is not whether there was or was not Buddhism in Central Asia with the Dharmaguptaka school a canon. The importance of the manuscript is that it allows and the language of Gandhara (section 8.2.1, "Hypotheses us to answer the question of which Buddhist texts were re on the Dharmaguptaka and Gandhara"). He refers to works corded in written fonn earlier and when. In other words. by A. Bareau "Les sectes Bouddhique du Petit Vehicule", what had been codified in writing by the first century A. D. Saigon, 1955, pp. 16-9, 29-30, 34, and E. Lamotte Salomon's analysis of language and style. as well as detailed "History of Indian Buddhism from the Origin to the Saka study of the Bairam-Ali manuscript. show that Buddhist texts Era", Louvain, 1988, pp. 529-32. The history of the continued to circulate in oral form and had only begun to be Dharmaguptaka school within India is not clear. Salomon's recorded in writing. The first half of the first millennium in claim that Buddhism of the Dharmaguptaka school was Central Asia was a period in which the written and oral widespread in the state on the territory of N iya and tradition continued to coexist. The latter was necessary to Krorayna is unfounded. Among Kharo~\hl documents dis- draw the broad masses to the Buddhist teaching: they could 72 l)!)nouscriptn Orieotnlin. VOL. 7 NO. 1MARCH2001 not be immediately introduced to the A.)'{asiihasrikii A large Appendix ("Inscribed pots and potsherds in praj11c/piiramitii, recently discovered among Kushan-period British Library", pp. 183-247) contains an analysis of manuscripts in Brahm! writing in Sanskrit (see Manuscripts 5 full votive inscriptions on whole clay vessels - the large in the Sclwyrn Collection. Jens Braarvig, editor-in-chiet: wheel-made vessels coarse red clay, globular in form (pot vol. I (Oslo, 2000), pp. 1-52). What we have here are A, B, C, D, E) and 26 inscriptions on individual fragments. written excerpts from the canon, by all appearances, one of They all contain the same votive formula, more or less the first attempts to record what had previously circulated complete: a gift "to the universal community" apparently in oral form. Work on the written codification of Buddhist from noble and wealthy women (as is indicated by Salo texts undoubtedly took place during this period in the mon mon's analysis of the proper names on pot B, see pp. 141- asteries of Northern India. 55). They ask for their health and the health of their In chapter 4 ("Origin and character of the collection"), husbands and those close to them. This sometimes includes doubts arise in connection with section 4.3, "Archaeologi "all living things''. Variant readings among the inscriptions cal parallels". It seems saturated with facts unrelated to the are minimal: one inscription mentions "a teacher of the Buddhist tradition. The same holds true with regard to other Dharmaguptaka school"; another "a teacher of the Sarvasti sections where Salomon draws parallels with other cultural vada school". Hence, there is as yet no cause to speak of realms as links in a chain of proof. Salomon's view on the a predominance of followers of the Dhannaguptaka school discovery of manuscripts enclosed in a clay vessel buried, it in Gandhara. The formula itself is well-known thanks to is assumed. on the grounds of a Buddhist monastery in discoveries in Hagga. It was copied by local scribes who Gandhara is that these were worn manuscripts that had been appear to have been minimally literate craftsmen; for this recopied. as is indicated by the note likhidago ('"[It is] writ reason, they presented certain ak~·aras - especially liga ten") found on many scrolls (pp. 71-6). Salomon holds tures of the sta, k.~va, rva, rma and other types - as they that this was a special ritual. Salomon is correct in describ saw them. This creates difficulties in determining a single ing the tradition of burying manuscripts, ritual objects, and standard for writing these ak~aras. At the same time, they human remains in clay vessels and reliquaries. But what were evidently good craftsmen, for they adorned their was the purpose of this" We n:call the Mahclparinirvcl1Ja inscriptions with flourishes: the lower parts of the ak.~aras .1·1/tra in its early Pali version; it describes the distribution of sa and na arc curved downward, while the ak.~·aras i and e the remains from the Buddha's funeral pyre among various display flourishes that extend significantly upward. Salo regions and cities. It was considered a great boon to receive mon displays great scholarly acumen in this section, once a handfol of ashes or a fragment of scorched cloth, not to again proving that he is a leading specialist on the GandharT speak of a tooth or a half-burned bone. This was a relic to language and Kharo~!hT writing. be buried in a place of honour, usually in a mortar, for ven In addition to the Appendix, the book contains a Glossary eration. As concerns old, worn manuscripts, they were (pp. 249-52), Bibliography (References, pp. 253-63), hardly considered "escheated", although they were no and Index (pp. 265-73). longer used for performing rituals. These were the holiest, The book makes an unusual impression: it resembles most read. most "prayed over" texts. and they had to be an encyclopaedia that brings together all that is known interred as sacred objects. The clay vessel in which the about GandharT culture and a host of parallels with the Bairam-Ali manuscript was discovered, clearly placed in cultures of other regions. The author's professionalism is a mortar. also contained a clay statuette of the Buddha everywhere evident. We eagerly await the appearance of and Sassanian coins of Shapiir II. This was undoubtedly his second book, a continuation of the present study. a sacred relic which sanctified the place where it was bur ied. This point of view should be borne in mind. M. Vorobyova-Desyatovskaya